Sat Paul and Ors v. Mubarak Singh,Vc.J.D.A.And Anr

ORDER

07.08.2026

¶01The instant contempt petition arises out of the order/judgment passed by the learned Writ Court dated 16.07.2013 in SWP No. 2197/2009 by virtue of which the writ petition preferred by the petitioners was disposed of with the following manner: "In the given circumstances, I deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Commissioner/Secretary to the Government, Finance Department, respondent No.5 herein, to consider the recommendations made by respondents 3 and 4 herein and make a decision within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of the order is served upon him and report compliance in the Registry of this Court. It is so ordered. It goes without saying that if the decision goes against the petitioners, they would be at liberty to challenge the same, if so advised."

¶02The respondents have filed the statement of facts, in which they have taken a specific stand that the respondents have filed various compliance reports from time to time in the instant contempt petition and the latest compliance report, which was filed by the respondents on 12.11.2025 reveals that a Sr. No. 204 2 CPSW No. 346/2016

reasoned consideration order was already passed by the respondents on

11.03.2024 rejecting the request for upgradation to the post of Rent Collector from the pay scale of ₹3050-4910 (Level-2) to ₹4000-6000 (Level-4), as the same was administratively and financially not viable. The respondents were called upon to examine the issue again and the respondents after examining the issue afresh have reached to the conclusion that has already been submitted by the respondents in the compliance report filed on 04.10.2025. Along with the said compliance report, the respondents have also placed on record a detailed consideration order dated 11.03.2024. The said order has already been reiterated, therefore, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that whatever was required on part of the respondents in conformity with the order/judgment passed by the learned Writ Court has already been done. As such, a prayer has been made that proceedings in the contempt petition be closed in the light of the aforesaid development.

¶03Thus, in the light of the stand taken by the respondents in the compliance report filed on 04.10.2025 and also in the light of fresh compliance report which has been filed in terms of order dated 06.10.2025, this Court is of the view that the order/judgment passed by the learned Writ Court stand complied with, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep the instant contempt petition alive.

¶04Accordingly, the proceedings in the contempt petition are closed. Rule, if any, stand discharged. However, dismissal of the instant contempt petition shall not come in the way of the petitioners to agitate their cause afresh 3 CPSW No. 346/2016

challenging the aforesaid consideration order, if so advised.

¶05A copy of the fresh compliance report has been provided to this Court by Mr. Atul Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, is taken on record.

(Wasim Sadiq Nargal) Judge Jammu:

07.08.2026 Vijay

Vijay Kumar 2026.08.10 17.24 Jammu

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CPSW No. 346/2016 in CPSW No. 318/2014 CM No. 2617/2019 Sat Paul and others ….Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through :- Mr. Vivek Jamwal, Advocate V/s Mubarak Singh, VC JDA and another ….Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Atul Verma, Advocate Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE